[{"_1":2,"_123":-5,"_124":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99,111],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6507081,"mediaKeyId","5861896-44d0dba58e616cb1c61dc34579e84631","parentId",5861896,"title","Votes at a glance: Sept. 30 Glendale council approved several routine items and waivers","audioSeconds",7866,"startMs",2209000,"endMs",10075000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5861896-44d0dba58e616cb1c61dc34579e84631&start=2209&end=10075","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5861896-44d0dba58e616cb1c61dc34579e84631/thumbnail_2209000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6507081/Glendale/Los-Angeles-County/California/Votes-at-a-glance-Sept-30-Glendale-council-approved-several-routine-items-and-waivers","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6507081-5c2c3f28a709befc118a1cf131449cc7/orig.mp4?Expires=1771135164&Signature=ogOriBaEC-et63oFUTjzEVy1~Pn4KTj62HKh7fK1sBvE5Fceg9U1E55EARXIrcYQP9rwU99uxt-FmWx0dQ4YMON~8lqIi68bNG2p17vs~wx33QVX1nK36wFS5BeVD~B0H1UmNJVceTuERYqRmtZHrWa5QWspJU7AvHNgQp92LFZAbCecmSqTKvpjMfX3tGaWyrYruyeJEYoCsU~DftgaLCuME5pqirM4g9VX9RC3lETQKByfnXYhhDngxH25zQsQbUvXEhkW8LSKHctwX-wiHoJ7MxR4H8zb7j-VqKPa2ZG6nSUnUUL6q9OqTZz~CBRr0YH-ip~ZbbG5XVxkQdoQsQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Glendale","date","2025-10-01T05:43:40Z","article","At its Sept. 30 meeting the Glendale City Council approved a number of routine and narrowly scoped actions by roll call with little extended debate. Highlights:

• Holland & Hart LLP conflict‑of‑interest waiver (Item 4G): Council authorized the city attorney to consent to the Southern California Public Power Authority (SCPPA) executing a conflict‑of‑interest waiver for Holland & Hart LLP for an unrelated matter and to permit future related waivers subject to the city attorney’s approval. A public speaker expressed concern about blanket waivers for future, unspecified matters; city staff said the waivers apply only to unrelated SCPPA transactions and the city attorney would retain approval authority.

• Ferno gurney standardization (Action item): The council approved standardization of specialized gurney equipment (Ferno) for Glendale Fire Department use and authorized purchases and maintenance supplies to support the existing fleet and in‑house technician repairs.

• League of California Cities delegate (Action item): Council designated a voting delegate and alternate for the 2025 League of California Cities conference (the motion named Councilmember Kasakhian as voting delegate and Councilmember Ossetorian as alternate).

These items were approved on the consent calendar or by single motions and roll‑call votes; staff said approvals aim to reduce administrative overhead and maintain continuity of operations.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","City Council - 9/30/25","oneSentenceSummary","On Sept. 30 the Glendale City Council approved several consent and action items including a conflict‑waiver authorization for Holland & Hart LLP, standardization and purchases for Ferno gurneys used by Glendale Fire Department, and selection of a voting delegate for the League of California Cities conference.","taxTitle","Glendale, Los Angeles County, California","taxId",4651,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6507091,"Council denies extra discretionary density for Glen Oaks housing project after neighbors, planners spar over size and parking",2820,11154000,13974000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5861896-44d0dba58e616cb1c61dc34579e84631&start=11154&end=13974","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5861896-44d0dba58e616cb1c61dc34579e84631/thumbnail_11154000.jpg","/articles/6507091/Glendale/Los-Angeles-County/California/Council-denies-extra-discretionary-density-for-Glen-Oaks-housing-project-after-neighbors-planners-spar-over-size-and-parking","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6507091-fcf88504038cc2543a3b235a3405b1b8/orig.mp4?Expires=1771135164&Signature=cjEQCkPMz9I5lwKZO7GrsR8dQEPLIWhf~z2xEWwfD7bvAi7UGYFDNd9AK0R6JFfISiEwkOtpXkTSMo6pLgW-nbUQ~sYEF~9nmP9rY2ynu~0PIdNHoW8LNMp~rR5pi7W~zNdLxfkyNyXlBe~bu24tz9TaqYDPfMK5HkReBrS3O~Ye5taP0EW8rChIPwuB0pk2g-uqxxYm1IlVnzzbtSRQCPAhDb6Q-3in8fH5IDtXzznU4GeKMl~~UWGiP8zIUDZn6GwT4tLt74UXxuhhleMLLIAK2yGhUh3bNQ5ImjN4RQUuwbz3jxgHIT81MRYFXVVsWinX20vP9IFC~zrnWa6X4g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Glendale City Council on Sept. 30 voted to deny a discretionary density bonus request for a proposed 43‑unit housing project at 441–445 West Glen Oaks Boulevard.

Project and request: The applicant sought approval to demolish two existing buildings (eight units) and build a new four‑story, 43‑unit multifamily development that would include nine affordable units (six very‑low income and three moderate income) and a semi‑subterranean parking level with 29 spaces. Because state density bonus law (and local implementing rules) grant a baseline density bonus, the developer would have been able to build 36 units by right; the council had discretion to approve the additional discretionary density above that baseline (the applicant requested an extra 7 units) and related waivers.

Council action and rationale: After public testimony and a staff report, council voted to deny the discretionary portion of the requested density bonus. The roll call on the motion to deny showed four votes in favor of denial and one opposed (Councilmembers Azadarian, Garpetian, Kasakhian and Mayor Najarian voted yes; Councilmember Rotman voted no).

Why it mattered: Speakers at the hearing included neighbors and community advocates who said the project would substantially increase site density, reduce unit sizes (a number of proposed studios were under 600 sq. ft.), and add parking pressure to an already constrained neighborhood near Kaiser Permanente and several schools. Several speakers urged the council to preserve existing family‑friendly unit mix or insist on more open space and parking. Supporters, including housing‑advocacy callers and project proponents, argued the site is near transit (a future bus rapid transit stop) and that the proposal adds affordable units and much‑needed rental capacity.

Concessions and waivers: The project also requested several waivers (unit‑size reductions, increased lot coverage, reduced setbacks and decreased landscape/open‑space percentages). City legal staff explained that waivers tied to the density bonus are not discretionary if denying them would physically preclude the developer from building the density they are legally entitled to; council therefore faced a narrow choice: approve the discretionary density (and associated waivers as needed to realize the design) or deny the discretionary density, which would require the applicant to redesign to the 100% density bonus they already may claim by right.

Public and staff follow‑up: Council directed that the denial be reflected in the formal action; staff will advise the applicant on next steps. Some council members urged the developer to consider a redesign with more open space, fewer sub‑600‑sq‑ft units and clearer plans to address parking and neighborhood compatibility.

Ending: The decision preserves more local control over the size and scale of this specific project while leaving intact the state density bonus baseline (36 units) the applicant may pursue by right unless the applicant withdraws or redesigns.","The Glendale City Council voted Sept. 30 to deny a discretionary density bonus for a proposed 43‑unit project at 441–445 West Glen Oaks Boulevard, rejecting an applicant request to exceed the state‑baseline density by seven additional units.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6507096,"Glendale staff introduces plan to delay and redistribute planned electric rate increases; public warns of steep bills",84,3704000,3788000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5861896-44d0dba58e616cb1c61dc34579e84631&start=3704&end=3788","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5861896-44d0dba58e616cb1c61dc34579e84631/thumbnail_3704000.jpg","/articles/6507096/Glendale/Los-Angeles-County/California/Glendale-staff-introduces-plan-to-delay-and-redistribute-planned-electric-rate-increases-public-warns-of-steep-bills","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6507096-5caf9fb07d2a84e303ac4271551fa9ad/orig.mp4?Expires=1771135164&Signature=FQPFw6GcBErbkKLcCJc9xENfQtb8GFNj-Hq5odfzbISCrr6ohR7WW5itg9qLf-ErcTRkTXMtAyqS1VHOstZ~6LS8XsR97MjU4qlFWbzZxhg~MYgRST-6oPXvkXS5HdZSuZfjBjcNH6h~AZBxzKc7xgf004YB9ZvStII88WZNiCwYIj2wjav~XVMfUOvlrIfAV0oj-u7XqMZ88Pp1Gb0~i0KWg9fNHkREyzjbyLJmxTPthHRIvbJyuohTm1Pyc8fbtPDgq7Xt-qY~RmvltV9nl7oiWnwgMftJ1mnzAcfTLuYtWGczbzxoyInIGq4zdKhbd5RKdmFeckABImP3Y~YhTA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Glendale Water & Power (GWP) staff on Sept. 30 presented an ordinance for introduction that would delay and redistribute scheduled electric rate increases approved in the 2023 cost‑of‑service analysis. The proposal would move larger increases to Nov. 1 of 2025, 2026 and 2027 and smooth the near‑term hit to customers.

Assistant General Manager Arjun Nesayan and General Manager Scott Mellon briefed council and answered detailed questions about meter estimates, billing accuracy and the utility’s capital program. The council did not adopt the ordinance that evening; staff said it will return Oct. 7 for final adoption. If council takes no action, the previously approved increases (from the Nov. 2023 cost‑of‑service analysis) would take effect as scheduled beginning Nov. 1.

Key technical points: Staff described the redistribution plan (cumulative system average rate increases are unchanged from the COSA adopted in November 2023) but explained the timing shift reduces the immediate increase for November 2025 and spreads the remainder across two subsequent Nov. 1 effective dates. The 2023 COSA had set a sequence of tiered adjustments; the redistribution plan keeps the same cumulative revenue target but alters the phasing.

Public reaction and council questions: Multiple residents told council recent bills feel much higher than the published average increases. Speakers asked whether billing estimates and meter issues might have caused unusually high customer bills and requested stronger quality assurance and replacement of faulty meters. GWP staff said the utility is actively replacing non‑communicating meters and that when estimates are corrected, the utility issues reimbursements or adjustments on customers’ accounts; staff also noted municipal utilities’ rate structures vary and that Glendale’s share of system costs currently places more of the burden on residential customers than some neighboring municipal utilities.

Why it matters: The adjustment changes timing rather than the total revenue target in the adopted COSA, so customers will still see higher bills over the multi‑year period but may avoid a larger immediate spike. Council members asked for clear communications and more information for residents who report outsized increases, and some asked staff to pursue longer‑term rate‑structure changes such as examining the city’s tiered rate approach.

Next steps: Council will consider adoption of the ordinance on Oct. 7. Staff also said they will continue meter replacements, review individual high‑bill complaints and provide more detailed outreach on how the phased increases affect different customer classes.

Ending: Councilmembers said they wanted written, customer‑facing explanations and specific data on meter corrections, and several asked staff to return with options for a broader review of the residential tiered structure at a future meeting.","Glendale Water & Power staff introduced an ordinance to defer and redistribute previously approved electric rate increases so larger increases are spread across three Nov. 1 effective dates (2025–2027). Council set the ordinance for adoption Oct. 7; staff said no action now would revert to the higher schedule previously approved in November 2023.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6507102,"Glendale council approves transfer of Zone C waste franchise to Waste Management; residents question monopoly and rates",88,1203000,1291000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5861896-44d0dba58e616cb1c61dc34579e84631&start=1203&end=1291","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5861896-44d0dba58e616cb1c61dc34579e84631/thumbnail_1203000.jpg","/articles/6507102/Glendale/Los-Angeles-County/California/Glendale-council-approves-transfer-of-Zone-C-waste-franchise-to-Waste-Management-residents-question-monopoly-and-rates","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6507102-43e866cb23732a931642c6521c601645/orig.mp4?Expires=1771135164&Signature=VjEkMVy6KwyYFc2gHYfrx1pk1K18R-fOTMSLSiHFLEqUZwVHvtB8Xi6P8T-UIaQYmWOVNdlOR5~hmNmxcGROH41kVSZr-IFzM0-ll0Ujm5WW1o8w-jP2dJaHix-SPeyeZKKNKJb09NumsVsvk~68BDMH0nMkiAxMiU8C8pqt5cAOFxFyPDngVFlhnv3k5qMBHqkW1KVaUJOEC92jEH8Z4LOi~ycIc1jp0LS1As9EKX5eI5uihKjG3zRSSw6zqXofhPo80ZKcFdQQReAPaAXkAFnXOurLCC~Sef~K0zikY8jeYYbdNLel7k66CUePrvwdW0yRO7d4zQmj0tLcLcKaKg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Glendale City Council on Sept. 30 approved a resolution assigning the city’s Zone C business and multifamily solid‑waste collection agreement (Contract R107072) from Waste Resource Technologies Inc. to Waste Management of California Inc.

Supporters on council framed the transfer as a continuity-of-service step; multiple public speakers urged the council to re-open the contract to competitive bidding and to clarify recent rate increases for residents in multi‑family properties.

Council approved the assignment by roll call with five yes votes. City staff said Waste Management will operate only in Zone C and must meet the same franchise standards as the outgoing contractor.

Why it matters: City franchise assignments affect service, local rates and competition. Speakers at the meeting warned concentration of hauling services can raise prices and reduce responsiveness; council members said they expect the new operator to meet Glendale’s customer service standards and that the franchise agreement includes enforcement measures.

What council decided and why: City staff explained Waste Management is a qualified national hauler with landfill access that could ease some future disposal constraints when local landfills close. Councilmember comments thanked Waste Resource Technologies for past service and said Waste Management had represented it could provide strong customer service at scale.

Public concern and questions: Herbert Milano and Edgemond Hakobian, two residents who spoke during public comment, urged the council to reopen Zone C to a new RFP rather than allowing an assignment. Milano said he has “personally seen increases in my waste disposal of nearly 500%” under recent changes and called Measure A — a voter‑approved charter amendment referenced in public testimony — a removal of safeguards that previously required more competitive procurement. Hakobian asked the city manager to provide a report on annual percentage fee increases by each vendor and asked whether Measure A would have affected the city’s ability to require a new RFP for an assignment.

Staff response and follow up: Public Works staff said Waste Management currently has no other Glendale zones and that contract language gives the city manager discretion to approve a qualified assignee. Staff and council also took questions about bulky‑item pickup differences between single‑family and multi‑family customers; staff committed to bring back options for improving bulky‑item responsiveness across contracts.

What residents asked for: Public commenters and some council members asked for (a) a staff report on fee increases by vendor in each zone, (b) clearer consumer contact procedures and (c) stronger assurances that Waste Management will maintain local customer service responsiveness rather than rely solely on automated systems.

Next steps: The assignment takes effect after the administrative process in the franchise agreement; staff said they will monitor service and enforce contract terms. Council asked staff to return on operational issues such as bulky‑item pickup and to provide the requested fee and service‑level clarifications.

Ending: The assignment passed, but the public record at the meeting makes clear residents and at least two council members expect additional staff reporting and monitoring of service and rates going forward.","The Glendale City Council voted to authorize assignment of the Zone C business and multifamily solid‑waste collection contract (R107072) from Waste Resource Technologies Inc. to Waste Management of California Inc., drawing public concern about monopoly power, past rate increases and whether a new RFP should have been issued.",{"_33":112,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":113,"_41":114,"_43":115,"_45":116,"_47":117,"_49":118,"_51":119,"_53":120,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":121,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":122,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6507086,"Glendale council establishes Commission on the Status of Women with monthly meeting requirement after debate over role and administrative authority",2752,11648000,14400000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5861896-44d0dba58e616cb1c61dc34579e84631&start=11648&end=14400","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5861896-44d0dba58e616cb1c61dc34579e84631/thumbnail_11648000.jpg","/articles/6507086/Glendale/Los-Angeles-County/California/Glendale-council-establishes-Commission-on-the-Status-of-Women-with-monthly-meeting-requirement-after-debate-over-role-and-administrative-authority","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6507086-f524e23d584a434adbdf497cebc3bb5d/orig.mp4?Expires=1771135164&Signature=ExacTMZ2ofATFG2r7IrlGpBdisUJOQ~HBx--XVuq3KWgrWUTFNZh7jX9sXAPEkwLcOtAYS-tNrB-dhfwh8bhSUAchr8k025HqslrUuaIuIazaYQn0H7LuGanAFCSJqTIKHAoZGwScaHnq4B2Opw8TobYnJaX~fjLTN3HqbGZXP2G0q9eKrEELQTZkKOBa3G89MZX4kDG4E3BpQJ0~7eXdacwBiyTs2hmWe6bmho331WSMVAC3luFiAOLYvR28-U3Aey7tVeS2lJ6sQEykUDnUi3AyI8dt~IKY3MwbFT9fldaAzIH7qUL-LAye2PV8Y~fJ8mCKJJY4queMg-rMuH2BQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Glendale City Council voted Sept. 30 to adopt an ordinance formally creating the Commission on the Status of Women and setting its meeting cadence and responsibilities.

What was approved: The ordinance defines the commission’s powers and duties, requires monthly meetings (rather than a quarterly schedule), and authorizes the commission to work with city departments to review and provide input on programs affecting women and girls. Supporters said monthly meetings are needed for effective programming and ongoing community engagement; opponents and some legal commenters cautioned that language tying the commission into administrative operations risked putting it inside staff decision‑making rather than maintaining an advisory posture to council.

Public comment and council debate: Speakers included former and current advocates for the commission who urged regular meetings and a clear role in programming and outreach. At the hearing, Councilmember Satrian and commission supporters argued the panel must be active enough to maintain continuity and to coordinate with departments on topics such as domestic‑violence outreach and related materials. Councilmember Brotman and other speakers stressed the council should avoid embedding the commission in administrative functions that properly belong to departments. The mayor and pro‑ordinance councilmembers described the measure as consistent with council direction and similar to other commissions’ coordination with departments in limited ways.

Vote and outcome: Council voted to adopt the ordinance; the roll call recorded unanimous support (councilmembers voting yes). The commission will have resources and pathways to work with departments on programming, subject to council oversight.

Next steps: Staff will publish the ordinance and the commission will begin meeting on the schedule set by the ordinance. Supporters urged an active agenda focused on programming, data collection and partnership with city departments and community groups.

Ending: Backers said a consistently meeting and resourced commission will increase opportunities to serve women and girls in Glendale; critics urged clear boundaries between advisory role and department administration.","The City Council adopted an ordinance creating a Commission on the Status of Women, setting meeting frequency and powers. Debate focused on whether the commission should have advisory-only status or be embedded in department operations; council adopted the ordinance with monthly meetings and a role coordinating with departments.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: Sept. 30 Glendale council approved several routine items and waivers

Council denies extra discretionary density for Glen Oaks housing project after neighbors, planners spar over size and parking

Glendale staff introduces plan to delay and redistribute planned electric rate increases; public warns of steep bills

Glendale council approves transfer of Zone C waste franchise to Waste Management; residents question monopoly and rates

Glendale council establishes Commission on the Status of Women with monthly meeting requirement after debate over role and administrative authority